Could the double slit being described by water wave interference be wrong?

Are there two waves in the double slit experiment or is the diffraction pattern simply the quantum field (medium) causing a single cohered wave to land where it does?

This ends all other interpretations.

If a wave is going through both slits …it is the same wave, not two separate waves. Interference isn’t happening. It’s just the path the quantum field assigns when there is a double slit.

The bare vertical gaps are a shadow of the sliver between the double slits. A path of diffraction is much stronger for a coherent wave. The gaps in the pattern is repeating the use of the sliver several times.

The physical water waves doing a double slit was just a coincidence.

Two separate waves from a single wave are being created by the double slits.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/mFM7wvZ4BVwpywyH6YKYdmt-Q4dEKXzyX5R7p0_YsVdyuaM-aMNINJT1HKsvkE0srkvLld20WInxUaKI7WeDcNDxmnrXh_64K3ou82vqL-QiINVo3Qc

This phenomenon happens with any single wave passing through separate opening or multiple waves passing through a single opening.

The wave function is an immutable universal constant at all levels. It is a mathematical function of the universe.

 

not anymore

Care to explain?

I did in my first post that you completely didn’t read.

My, aren’t we confident.

Are you confident enough to take it to real experts?

Or are you specifically keeping it to this lay audience because you think you can caste your spell of superior insights over here?

<p style="text-align: center;">How much does self-doubt play in your mental thinking process?</p>
Remember those stone tools I spoke about, my first tendency when I found that little trove of chips and tools around one spot, was to start looking at all the fractured rocks, trying to understand what it was that made me believe the one was hand tooled and while I know most are natural fracturing. Through that process, I learned a lot more details about the way rocks are fractured, than I'd never noticed before. That's part of my ever increasing "search pattern". <p style="text-align: center;"></p> <p style="text-align: center;"></p> What I'm driving at is that I think a real scientist, when they make an amazing discovery, their first instinct is to doubt it. Question it, examine it, ask all the hard questions focusing on why "I" might be wrong.

Whereas it seems in our neo-Republican culture, that’s out the window and when folks believe that’ve made a great insight they then proceed to massage all the evidence into one’s “insight.”

But, no matter how popular that process has become in our political/business world, it remains bullshit and self-destructive, and you’ll never do any serious learning if you don’t naturally question yourself and also welcome plus examine all challenges.

Rather than dismissing them with arrogant superiority, as seems to be your process.

It’s the lighter colored stones, the Red Jasper tools were found previously and in different locations.

 

 

What is wrong with you?

duplicate
@pttsburgjoe - What is wrong with you?
Funny that. It's sort of what I'm trying to figure out about you. :-)

But you just keep on rambling along as though you were the only one in the room.

So while you are talking to yourself, I’m trying to talk to you and see if you can explain anything - but you don’t,

and here we are.

What I’m driving at is that I think a real scientist (in fact, or spirit), when they make an amazing discovery, their first instinct is to doubt it. Question it, examine it, ask all the hard questions focusing on why “I” might be wrong.

Oh yeah perhaps i should also point out once again in a genuine good-faith scientific dialogue we respond to each others questions and challenges.

What you are doing, is nothing more than a salesman obsessed with pitching his product.

As you try to put yourself on some, I’m a genius thinker soap-box.

 

 

Perhaps that’s why my feeling of contempt for you and your game sneaks through now and again.

::did someone hear something?:: no, nothing important.

Can we prove the sliver between slits in the double slit is projected onto the final panel by changing the slivers shape? I know the distance between slits is important but is there any wiggle room? Would this kill the idea of wave interference?

Or perhaps you are missing something.

 

Plugged ears has worked for the right wing so well. For the rest of humanity not so good.

It’s rather amazing how many people have the f’n gaul to get all pissed off and defensive when you challenge them, or worse if one dare’s offer a factual correction it’s treated like a mortal assault. WTF

JOE, WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO GOOD FAITH LEARNING AND HONEST DEBATE?

I suggest all you are after is coddling.

Excuse me for not being your teddy bear.